On Wed, 2014-05-14 at 16:05 +0100, Daniel Feist wrote: ...
> I agree 10% isn't that much and this testing maybe isn't 100% through, > but I think it's fairly clear that unless you use minimalClient with > 4.3, it doesn't matter which features you turn off (even all of them), > 4.3 still doesn't perform as fast as 4.2. Also I'm surprised that 3.1 > runs so fast, even if it doesn't scale quite as well as 4.x. > > Couple of outstanding question: > > 1) I assume your recommendation about leaving stale connection > checking on by default unless you know what you are doing is still the > same in 4.3? Maybe it's a good idea to turn if off by default for > idempotent http methods and on by default for others, rather than > having it on for everything? > We are actually planning to do away with indiscriminate stale connection checking for each request in 4.4 [1][2] The current plan is to start checking connections only after a certain period of inactivity. We might also treat idempotent requests differently, but generally people tend to scream bloody murder every time they see an I/O exception and blame it on HttpClient. This is the reason why we have the damn check on by default. > 2) I'm still unsure why 4.3 is running slower than 4.2, even with > everything turned off.. > > Let's keep digging. > For my particular use case i think I might just stick to 3.1 for now, > until our next minor release anyway, because the huge performance > difference I was seeing between 3.1 and 4.3 it seems was 100% down to > the stale connection check! That said i like the fluent interface and > flexibility of 4.3. > I would advise against using HC 3.1. It has been unmaintained for too long. HC 4.2 has the same fluent APIs so you should not lose too much. Oleg [1] http://wiki.apache.org/HttpComponents/HttpComponentsRoadmap [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HTTPCLIENT-1493 --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
